Wireless N Why?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by nando2323, Mar 30, 2010.

  1. nando2323 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #1
    Why would you need wireless N on the iPad at all? You cannot stream media from your computer with it, you cannot sync over wireless with it, so what is the purpose of wireless N on a device like this. I just wonder why they even bother, besides the fact that people that don't know any better think it will make their internet faster.
     
  2. melman101 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #2
    I know better and it's a big deal for me, cause my Airport Extreme supports 5ghz N. My 2.4ghz Wifi network is saturated with interference from other apartments. I, for one, am happy that we have N.
     
  3. markosb macrumors 6502

    markosb

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    #3
    If you have a N modem you can connect from further away, I think 300 ft.
     
  4. sassenach74 macrumors 65816

    sassenach74

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Location:
    Hampshire, England
    #4
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

    You can stream media with apps like Air Video. Sure it would also benefit VNC. Generally N has a wider range too.
     
  5. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #5
    Uh...."why not?" Wireless n is significantly faster than wireless g, and it's noticeable even with standard web browsing.
     
  6. gwynne macrumors 68000

    gwynne

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    #6
    There will actually be a number of app/backend solutions to allow streaming media. I'm not just speaking theoretically--Air Video and Sling are two that come immediately to mind.
     
  7. markosb macrumors 6502

    markosb

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
  8. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #8
    That was true when Internet speeds were around 3-5mbps but 12+mbps service is fairly common now w/ cable. Plus at this point 802.11n is no more expensive than 802.11g and is the new standard. It would have been a little outrageous if they stuck the older 802.11g inside.
     
  9. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #9
    I just find that at least for my use of it G is more then enough. Yes I know N has a longer range but, most people I think will go only 20-40 ft away from their routers anyhow. I guess Im just mad that I can't stream my library through my wireless N unless I install some third party app to do it.
     
  10. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #10
    Also that was true and still is true, G is 54mpbs even at half duplex its 27mbps which is fast enough for 90% or more of high speed internet out there. Unless Google comes out with that 100Mbps ISP which I don't see coming anytime soon.
     
  11. Unprocessed1 macrumors 65816

    Unprocessed1

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
  12. dagomike macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    #12
    Anyone know if the iPad is 5 GHz?

    As stated, N offers better range and reliability beyond speed. It's also a spec sheet bullet. I'm hopeful Apple will introduce iTunes streaming soon. It's such an obvious feature to stream music and movies from your computer even though it may discourage people from spending big bucks on larger models.
     
  13. sassenach74 macrumors 65816

    sassenach74

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Location:
    Hampshire, England
    #13
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

    Why are you mad about that? Are you also mad that you can't create a spreadsheet without buying an app??
     
  14. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #14
    Yeah it's just my gripe for not having iTunes streaming and syncing over wireless.
     
  15. Unprocessed1 macrumors 65816

    Unprocessed1

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    #15
    How exactly do you know you won't be able to do this with an app? (not attacking you, I'm sincerely asking if it's possible or not)
     
  16. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #16
    I just think it should be a built in feature that's all. I have over 400 movies and 1,000 TV shows and 80GB of music on my mini HTPC. My Apple TV for the most part streams this with no problem, why couldn't they just make it the same with the iPad. I guess I will have to download and configure some third party software to accomplish what I want. Oh well I guess
     
  17. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #17
    Extra cost is minimal. In a few years, n will be widely available on public networks and will make things far less congested in public spaces where multiple users are trying to access the same channel. Also, theoretical speed is not the same as real-world. Given all the interference, any extra bandwidth is helpful.
     
  18. samac92 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    #18
    yeah as people have said, you can stream media over wifi with apps
     
  19. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #19
    Yeah I'm sure it's possible but just hate to have to install an app to accomplish this, and that prob comes with installing/configuring something on my Mini to be able to talk to it, not that it's hard to do I just hate having to run something else on my mini, I already have iTunes, Plex, Mail, iChat, Growl, Xbox360 connect, and now something else. Just a gripe that they couldn't just let iTunes stream.
     
  20. 4DThinker macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    #20
    Someone else also pointed out a Sharing option in the Settings menu. On a PC activating Sharing means media and documents can be accessed by other PCs in the house. It might be the best way to get your iWork files to a PC that can print or otherwise use them. In any case the faster your home Wifi is (N) the faster data can be transferred between local devices, assuming all support N.
     
  21. Crackbone macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #21
    Additionally 802.11N tends to have greater range and is less effected by barriers such as walls, etc.

    Since the proliferation of N, I've moved to a completely wireless setup @ home, as it has the bandwidth and its robust enough to handle all of the weird architecture going on in the house. :p
     
  22. jclardy macrumors 68040

    jclardy

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #22
    For me: the increased range of N (nearly 2x), streaming audio + video from my mac mini while I am in the house, and most importantly, for controlling my mac mini from the other room,

    Seriously, if they didn't include wireless N people will complain. At this point I doubt a 802.11N chip costs much more than a 802.11G one.
     
  23. err404 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    #23
    Sorta... N is a stronger more robust signal in general, but the 5Ghz range is impacted worse by walls then the 2.4Ghz range. In an interference free zone, N is best in the older 2.4Ghz range.
     
  24. Unprocessed1 macrumors 65816

    Unprocessed1

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    #24
    If you're upset itunes isn't natively streaming then are you saying you never use apps to increase the functionality of the ipad/ipod touch/iphone? :rolleyes:

    That's the whole point of apps!
     
  25. nando2323 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #25
    Yes I know that. But I think this should just be a built in feature. iTunes already does this to the Apple TV so why re-invent the wheel.
     

Share This Page